ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00042318
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Eileen Campbell | Zoom Sports Limited Costcutters Kinvara |
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | {text} | {text} |
Representatives |
|
|
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Regulation 10 of the European Communities (Protection of Employees on Transfer of Undertakings) Regulations 2003 (S.I. No. 131 of 2003) | CA-00052794-001 | 13/09/2022 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Regulation 10 of the European Communities (Protection of Employees on Transfer of Undertakings) Regulations 2003 (S.I. No. 131 of 2003) | CA-00052794-003 | 13/09/2022 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 12/02/2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Niamh O'Carroll
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 following the referral of the complaint to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint.
Background:
The Complainant alleges that following a transfer of undertaking her new employer failed to pay her for her breaks.
|
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant after taking the affirmation gave her evidence as follows: The Complainant was working in cost cutters for eight years. The Complainant was always paid for breaks. The two previous owners always paid for her breaks. When the Complainant asked one of the previous owners to confirm in writing that that was the case, he denied that she was paid breaks however her payslips submitted into evidence demonstrate that she is paid for her breaks. When she worked for the previous owner, her payslip demonstrated that she was paid for the breaks. Her payslip dated 06.08.2021 shows that she worked 32 hours and she was paid €400.00 gross. Again on the 16.07.2021 she worked 32 hours and she was paid €400.00 . She gets a break of 15 minutes in the morning and 30 minutes for lunch. In comparison her payslip 18.06.2023, Zoom Sports Ltd, she worked 32 hours and she is paid € 12.50 per hour. Monday to Thursday 7-3. She was paid €375.00 gross and it should have been €400.00.
|
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent after taking the affirmation gave his evidence as follows: |
Findings and Conclusions:
Having carefully considered all of the evidence together with the supporting documentation I am satisfied, primarily based on the payslips submitted into evidence, that the Complainant was paid for her breaks with her previous employer. The payslips dated 06.08 2021 and 16.07. 2021 clearly set out that breaks were paid for. It is on that basis that I find that the complaint is well founded and accordingly succeeds. The Respondent is to pay to the Complainant the sums due for her lunchbreak for the period of six months prior to the 13.09.2022 being the date the claim was filed with the WRC but ceasing on the date of the Transfer of the business to Mr. Wasif. |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
CA-00052794-001: The Respondent is to pay to the Complainant the sums due for her lunchbreaks for the period of six months prior to the 13.09.2022, being the date the claim was filed with the WRC but ceasing on the date of the Transfer of the business to Mr. Wasif. CA-00052794-003: I make no decision in relation to this matter as it is a duplicate claim. |
Dated: 12th of April 2024
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Niamh O'Carroll
Key Words:
Transfer of Undertakings. Breaks. Payment for breaks. |